Too many of the potential jurors said that even if the defendant, Elisa Meadows, was guilty, they were unwilling to issue the $500 fine a city attorney was seeking, said Ren Rideauxx, Meadows’ attorney.

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I’ll bite:
      First of all can we acknowledge that every system is going to be flawed? You’re either going to have innocent people convicted and sent to jail, or guilty people set free. Likely you’ll have some of both.

      With that in mind, what do you consider an acceptable ratio of innocent people convicted in order to make sure guilty people are also convicted? As many as it takes?

      • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        The whole point I’m making is that systemic flaws are unavoidable and therefore Blackstone’s formulation is a pile of horseshit.

        It literally doesn’t even matter what system I think would be better. I claimed that societies can’t function under Blackstone’s formulation and our present circumstances prove that point handily.

        Just because you are happy with it doesn’t mean it’s good or that other people should just accept it.

        • hangonasecond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          You’re not really making a point, you’re making a claim. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but you haven’t really said any reason why you think society can’t function when they value protecting the rights of the innocent over guaranteeing 100% of the guilty are punished.

          When you say “our present circumstances prove that point”, are you saying that all of society’s problems can be linked to jury nullification? Or to the fact your jurisdiction is too light handed with criminals, or felons, or both? It’s a very bold, very vague claim, considering it’s well studied that rehabilitative/educational and not punitive measures are more effective at reducing crime, so making the current system more heavy handed doesn’t seem to be the answer, if one exists.

          • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yeah, people make claims in debate, not points.

            I don’t list reasons because it’s self-evident and very blatantly obvious why. Go to the news subs on any Lemmy server and you’ll see why.

            You’re just angry I am not giving you the fight that you want because you saw me saying something that opposes your little political agenda, and so you came here to proselytize.

            Literally no one said anything about punishment at all but here you are, peddling your enabling crap, just like I knew one of you would.

            Well, I’m not playing along. I said societies can’t function under Blackstone’s formulation and my stance is not gonna change because you don’t like it. You can’t bully me into submitting to your dogmatic cult bullshit.